1
   

Should gay marriage be allowed?

 
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Oct, 2005 08:06 am
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
Exactly including trying to ban it at the Federal level like Bush tried to a couple of years ago.

I believe it should be up to the state to decide.

Including also people trying to get an amendment to the constitution. Or trying to bypass state law, that was already established by some.
kmchugh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Oct, 2005 06:07 pm
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
Your getting off track, i thought we are talking about our Marriage. Pertaining to our law it's just against Man as you say.

So is smoking dope. You cannot see the obvious flaws in you own logic. Are you the arbiter of which laws must be follwoed, and which can be violated?

Quote:
I'm not the one wanting to change our law?

No, you just believe that only you are above it.

Quote:
Your wrong again. What does the term UNITED STATES mean to you? To me it means each state is like it's own little country, with it's own military and Government. Funny you think they work for the government when the government works for us?

Never said it, don't believe it. I was trying to pin you down on where you think the issue should be decided, and legislated. By the way, had you paid a little more attention to your lessons in civics classes, and a little less to the pipe, you would have learned that the no state can pass any law that violates the constitution. Might I suggest you read up on what the courts have said about religious freedom (which, whether you like it or not, includes freedom from religion as ruled by the SCOTUS) and the equal protection clause of the constitution.

Quote:
Nope it tripped you up, for you are the one that does not know how it works!

OK, oh great, esteemed and learned one. Show me how it works. Show me (not by your opinion, but by reference to something like the constitution, court ruling, or public law) where I am wrong. Show me I don't know how it works.

Quote:
The reason the constitution came up is because your guys were saying they were be denied a right to marry? They are not! I did not make these fact up it it law. Find out for your self you don't have to believe me, but you should know before you start arguing. If it is legal in Mass the other states do not have to recognize them as such. So i guess the answer is NO.

Actually, by long standing legal agreement between states, the states must recognize legally performed marriages from other states.

Quote:
I don't have to decide anything, i just know the law.

Cool. Show me. Don't tell me your addled opinion, reference me to a website where such laws are spelled out. I can send you to several that contain US law, and the funny thing is that none of what you have to say is in any of them. You don't know quite as much as you think (using that term very loosely) do.

Quote:
I don't have to show anything concerning hetero marriage, i'm married legally. What if all the states don't agree, what's your plan after that? By your train of thought you are saying if one state makes it legal they are going to force the other to recognize it? I think you already lost for they have already proven there will be no agreement.

The agreement already exists. Otherwise, your legal marriage in New Mexico would not be legal if you moved to Arizona.

Kevin McHugh
kmchugh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Oct, 2005 06:22 pm
@Drnaline,
Oh, and in case you were wondering what the "founding fathers" might say about freedom from religion, wonder no more:

"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546

KM
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Oct, 2005 08:57 am
@kmchugh,
kmchugh wrote:
So is smoking dope. You cannot see the obvious flaws in you own logic. Are you the arbiter of which laws must be follwoed, and which can be violated?


No, you just believe that only you are above it.


Never said it, don't believe it. I was trying to pin you down on where you think the issue should be decided, and legislated. By the way, had you paid a little more attention to your lessons in civics classes, and a little less to the pipe, you would have learned that the no state can pass any law that violates the constitution. Might I suggest you read up on what the courts have said about religious freedom (which, whether you like it or not, includes freedom from religion as ruled by the SCOTUS) and the equal protection clause of the constitution.


OK, oh great, esteemed and learned one. Show me how it works. Show me (not by your opinion, but by reference to something like the constitution, court ruling, or public law) where I am wrong. Show me I don't know how it works.


Actually, by long standing legal agreement between states, the states must recognize legally performed marriages from other states.


Cool. Show me. Don't tell me your addled opinion, reference me to a website where such laws are spelled out. I can send you to several that contain US law, and the funny thing is that none of what you have to say is in any of them. You don't know quite as much as you think (using that term very loosely) do.


The agreement already exists. Otherwise, your legal marriage in New Mexico would not be legal if you moved to Arizona.

Kevin McHugh
"So is smoking dope. You cannot see the obvious flaws in you own logic. Are you the arbiter of which laws must be followed, and which can be violated?"

So do you follow all laws and not break any? I dought that! Seems your being a little hipocritical aren't you? Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. Yet i see no stones in the air. So what do you call the flaw in your sinless logic?

"No, you just believe that only you are above it."

Not above it, you forget there is a penalty. As far as being above it i refer to you to my quote above this one.

"Never said it, don't believe it. I was trying to pin you down on where you think the issue should be decided, and legislated. By the way, had you paid a little more attention to your lessons in civics classes, and a little less to the pipe, you would have learned that the no state can pass any law that violates the constitution. Might I suggest you read up on what the courts have said about religious freedom (which, whether you like it or not, includes freedom from religion as ruled by the SCOTUS) and the equal protection clause of the constitution."

Never said what and i know you don't believe? Trying but did not succeed. "any law that violates the constitution" Really, what about slavery and women sufferage, Blacks right to vote? I suggest you read up, show me where is talks about freedom FROM, you saying it does is not enough? I need physical proof! Equal protection, are you saying we are not equal?

"OK, oh great, esteemed and learned one. Show me how it works. Show me (not by your opinion, but by reference to something like the constitution, court ruling, or public law) where I am wrong. Show me I don't know how it works."

I already showed you. It Say Freedom For not FROM. Yet you won't believe it or can show me anything to the contrary. You yourself admitted it said For not FROM. So being showed you have! You just bend and twist it to your agenda but it just won't fit.

"Actually, by long standing legal agreement between states, the states must recognize legally performed marriages from other states. "

Prove it! Or are you just giving an opinion? I guess that works both ways, LOL. Even if there were a long standing agreement i suppose it would work on a per case basis anyway.

"Cool. Show me. Don't tell me your addled opinion, reference me to a website where such laws are spelled out. I can send you to several that contain US law, and the funny thing is that none of what you have to say is in any of them. You don't know quite as much as you think (using that term very loosely) do."

I could but why make it easy on you. I found out for my self so should you. You can send what ever i probably already have it. Your a fast reader, you already researched it? In how many of those books? For me being inflated you sure haven't proved me wrong yet, i would think you could do it easy being as i'm not so smart?

"The agreement already exists. Otherwise, your legal marriage in New Mexico would not be legal if you moved to Arizona."

When i got married. I did it in a church in front of my God to my now wife of 18 years. Why would i give a **** if arizona recognizes it? Oregon is the only state in the union that has a right to die law. Are you saying if that is so they should be able to go to any state and off themselves? I think those states would say different.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Oct, 2005 09:18 am
@kmchugh,
kmchugh wrote:
Oh, and in case you were wondering what the "founding fathers" might say about freedom from religion, wonder no more:

"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546

KM
"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship,"

That to me means no one can force you too if you don't want too. Is some one forcing you?

"place, or ministry whatsoever,"

That means they can't force you to go to church either.

"nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, "

That means they can't beat you for NOT going.

" nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... "

I believe that to mean what we are talking about here. You have already indicated you have none, ie religion or belief in a higher being, so i don't see how this applys to you. Even given that you are actively trying to make me suffer for my beliefs which is illegal in your eyes right? Or is that different to you? I smell a double standard comming?

"All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion,"

That means me again because you don't believe in God.

"and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."

In that whole paragragh, not once did i see any thing that appeared to me to say you have the freedom FROM religion. It to the contrary i think we have all the right and you have to listen or shut yourself off from the world. I won't be surprised if you do the later. I know i will exercise every right you just quoted for my religious freedom and according to Tom, I CAN!
0 Replies
 
oaktonarcher
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 09:46 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:

"Actually, by long standing legal agreement between states, the states must recognize legally performed marriages from other states. "

Prove it! Or are you just giving an opinion? I guess that works both ways, LOL. Even if there were a long standing agreement i suppose it would work on a per case basis anyway.


Its called the Full Faith and Credit clause, it exists and no the Marriages are not look on in a case by case basis.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 12:16 pm
@Brent cv,
I didn't mean case by case as far as marriage.
0 Replies
 
kmchugh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 03:16 pm
@oaktonarcher,
oaktonarcher wrote:
Its called the Full Faith and Credit clause, it exists and no the Marriages are not look on in a case by case basis.

Thank you.

I must admit to a certain frustration to this debate. Not because I am having difficulty arguing my points, but because so far, drnaline has really not accurately answered any of my points. I don't know that I've ever met anyone with so little constitutional knowledge who tried so hard to debate the constitution. So, I'll sit back and wait to respond until such time as he (or anyone else) is actually able to answer any of the points made so far in this debate.

Kevin McHugh
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 03:41 pm
@Brent cv,
Which constitution would you be talking about? State of Fed? If a state which one? I'm still waiting for a good reason to ammend the the constitution so wait you shall. Harm if it happens is after the fact. Not a reason to change it in the first place. The title of the thread says it all. Same legal rights the heteros have so do the Homo's. That answer should end it, for there is no discrimination. The reason for your argument in the first place right?
0 Replies
 
Warfire80
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Oct, 2005 02:21 am
@Brent cv,
IMO, gays, lesbians or whatever are human beings also, so give them the satisfaction they want, wouldnt be such a big deal if we would just let it go.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Oct, 2005 09:26 am
@Brent cv,
Yes they are human beings, but they are human beings with the same rights as us.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 01:38:20